Thanks Zihao bring this out and looking forward to the new minor release. I think 3.3.0(without 3.3.0-alpha) is ok for me, personally, if we consider the **main function of our code to be stable**
I have released version 3.0.0-alpha but is not happy with that. Not many users for that version, and we have to continue releasing the 3.0.0 base on 3.0.0-alpha. For that example, I think the process from 3.0.0-alpha -> 3.0.0 is the same as 3.0.0 -> 3.0.1, but the 'alpha' suffix ending will cause user distrust On Sun, Feb 23, 2025 at 11:11 AM SbloodyS <[email protected]> wrote: > sorry, I forgot to cc dev. > > > -- > Best Wishes > ZiHao > > > ---------- Forwarded message --------- > 发件人： SbloodyS <[email protected]> > Date: 2025年2月23日周日 10:55 > Subject: Discussion of new version release > To: <[email protected]> > > > Hi community, > > It has been six months since the release of version 3.2.2. We plan > to release the new version before March 30th. Because we have made great > changes and reconstructions in the new version, there are also many > incompatible changes. So our new version is called 3.3.0-release according > to the previous habit, or is it called 3.3.0-alpha-release? > > > -- > Best Wishes > ZiHao > -- Best Wish —Jay Chung
